Ron Paul's history of anti-gay slurs

For years, Ron Paul published a series of newsletters that dispensed political news and investment advice, but also routinely indulged in bigotry. Here's a selection of some especially inflammatory passages, with links [see original article] to scanned images of the original documents in which they appeared.

The December 1989 Ron Paul Political Report contains entries on a “new form of racial terrorism,” cites former Congressman Bill Dannemeyer’s claim that “the average homosexual has 1,000 or more partners in a lifetime,” and quotes Lew Rockwell, president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, in the third person.

In January 1990, the Ron Paul Political Report cites “a well-known libertarian editor” who “told me: ‘The ACT-UP slogan on stickers plastered all over Manhattan is ‘Silence=Death.’ But shouldn’t it be Sodomy = Death’?”

The September 1994 issue of the Ron Paul Survival Report states that “those who don’t commit sodomy, who don’t get blood a transfusion, and who don’t swap needles, are virtually assured of not getting AIDS unless they are deliberately infected by a malicious gay.”

The June 1990 issue of the Political Report says: “I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities.”

A January 1994 edition of the Survival Report states that "gays in San Francisco do not obey the dictates of good sense," adding: "[T]hese men don't really see a reason to live past their fifties. They are not married, they have no children, and their lives are centered on new sexual partners." Also, "they enjoy the attention and pity that comes with being sick."

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

Your threads are making everyone nauseous.

Don't ya wish sometimes that we could actually PRAY some of these Gays away? Since when did "Panties in a Wad" become a sport?

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

Your threads are making everyone nauseous.

Don't ya wish sometimes that we could actually PRAY some of these Gays away? Since when did "Panties in a Wad" become a sport?

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

It IS true and people who aren't idiots should "give a shit".

Ron Paul> [I oppose] efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman

Ron Paul [Oct. 2011]> I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected. I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state

He is a co-sponsor of the "Marriage Protection Act" - which would prevent Federal judges from ruling on the constitutionality of (i.e. overturning) DOMA.

Ron Paul did NOT vote even for ENDA. Under his philosophy, if you are discriminated against on the job you have the right to quit and go elsewhere.

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

It IS true and people who aren't idiots should "give a shit".

Ron Paul> [I oppose] efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman

Ron Paul [Oct. 2011]> I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected. I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state

He is a co-sponsor of the "Marriage Protection Act" - which would prevent Federal judges from ruling on the constitutionality of (i.e. overturning) DOMA.

Ron Paul did NOT vote even for ENDA. Under his philosophy, if you are discriminated against on the job you have the right to quit and go elsewhere.

Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy. He is forced to make tough decisions on pieces of legislation that do not necessarily agree with his paradigm. Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy". It is true that states should not be forced to recognize same sex marriage licenses issued by other states. You are correct on the last comment: under his philosophy if you are discriminated against on a job (for whatever reason) you have the right to quit and go elsewhere. I agree with that. Nobody is forcing anyone to work for a particular employer.

Your crusade to make Ron Paul some rabidly anti-gay candidate is as pathetic as it is vacuous.

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

Your threads are making everyone nauseous.

Have to disagree here. I think the core values of anyone seeking the highest office is fair game for analysis. Even if he doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, he still intends to be influential, and in that regard, his followers should expect hard questions. Although his position on gays would likely not matter given his position that the government should not get involved, the positions on Jews that have been alleged could very definitely influence his foreign policy.

You think I give a shit if someone hates me secretly or as a personal matter? All I care about is having equal rights. Ron Paul has made it clear that his position is to get the government out of marriage and provide everyone, both heterosexual or gay the opportunity to identify themselves however they like.

Your threads are making everyone nauseous.

Have to disagree here. I think the core values of anyone seeking the highest office is fair game for analysis. Even if he doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination, he still intends to be influential, and in that regard, his followers should expect hard questions. Although his position on gays would likely not matter given his position that the government should not get involved, the positions on Jews that have been alleged could very definitely influence his foreign policy.

I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

mocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative

We should ignore the stated beliefs of a man who wants to be president, as if this has nothing to do with his policies?

Paul wants to get the government out of marraige and have straight couples receive the "sacrement" of marriage from religious institutions. Yet when it comes to gay partnerships, all he can do is say "voluntary association"? Couldn't one say the same about two siblings... or a boy and his dog?

mocktwinkie> under his philosophy if you are discriminated against on a job (for whatever reason) you have the right to quit and go elsewhere.

What if it is a government job or the military? If women soldiers don't like sexual harassment they shouldn't enlist? Maybe gay students who are bullied should be transferred to another school? If gay bashing is ubiquitous they should be home schooled or leave the country? If a professional association bars black people, they should just form their own? Too bad DADT was repealed, otherwise maybe gay people should have formed their own Army, too....

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy".

He believes in getting the government out of marriage and allowing everyone the freedom to define themselves and their union. "Marriage" would be something that is recognized by a church or individually.

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy".

He believes in getting the government out of marriage and allowing everyone the freedom to define themselves and their union. "Marriage" would be something that is recognized by a church or individually.

You sure have weird fantasies.. Like every married person is gonna give up those tax advantages, those automatic benefits, no paperwork for declaring who is a 'spouse' and who isnt.. Yeah, their gonna give it all up so they all would be forced to pay attorneys big bucks for 'trusts' and spousal agreements, joint ownership etc etc.... yeah right..

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy".

He believes in getting the government out of marriage and allowing everyone the freedom to define themselves and their union. "Marriage" would be something that is recognized by a church or individually.

You sure have weird fantasies.. Like every married person is gonna give up those tax advantages, those automatic benefits, no paperwork for declaring who is a 'spouse' and who isnt.. Yeah, their gonna give it all up so they all would be forced to pay attorneys big bucks for 'trusts' and spousal agreements, joint ownership etc etc.... yeah right..

Everyone would be in a civil union, it just wouldn't be called "marriage".

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative

We should ignore the stated beliefs of a man who wants to be president, as if this has nothing to do with his policies?

Paul wants to get the government out of marraige and have straight couples receive the "sacrement" of marriage from religious institutions. Yet when it comes to gay partnerships, all he can do is say "voluntary association"? Couldn't one say the same about two siblings... or a boy and his dog?

mocktwinkie> under his philosophy if you are discriminated against on a job (for whatever reason) you have the right to quit and go elsewhere.

What if it is a government job or the military? If women soldiers don't like sexual harassment they shouldn't enlist? Maybe gay students who are bullied should be transferred to another school? If gay bashing is ubiquitous they should be home schooled or leave the country? If a professional association bars black people, they should just form their own? Too bad DADT was repealed, otherwise maybe gay people should have formed their own Army, too....

Of course not if it is a government job or the military -- they aren't private so they can't discriminate. He wasn't talking about that, he was talking about private businesses at large. A bar or a restaurant, for instance.

As far as marriage, ANYONE would be free to call their union whatever they want. Both straight and gay would be equal in terms of what they want to call themselves.

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy".

He believes in getting the government out of marriage and allowing everyone the freedom to define themselves and their union. "Marriage" would be something that is recognized by a church or individually.

You sure have weird fantasies.. Like every married person is gonna give up those tax advantages, those automatic benefits, no paperwork for declaring who is a 'spouse' and who isnt.. Yeah, their gonna give it all up so they all would be forced to pay attorneys big bucks for 'trusts' and spousal agreements, joint ownership etc etc.... yeah right..

Everyone would be in a civil union, it just wouldn't be called "marriage".

You go sell that to all those married folks.. see how many will laugh at you hysterically.

Wolverine4 saidmocktwinkie> I would rather have someone tell me they dislike me and give me equal rights than tell me they love me and that it's why they won't grant me equality.

False dichotomy.

And what "equal rights" is he going to give you?At best he'll take away the rights of others!

mocktwinkie> Ron Paul's ultimate philosophy is about freedom and promoting that which tends to be in harmony with that overall philosophy

It's just gays who are outside of that societal "harmony"?

mocktwinkie> Paul wants the government out of marriage altogether for both straight and gay people. How he believes marriage is "defined" on a personal level is his prerogative -- that does not contradict his position. Quit posting "opinions" as though they are his "policy".

He believes in getting the government out of marriage and allowing everyone the freedom to define themselves and their union. "Marriage" would be something that is recognized by a church or individually.

You sure have weird fantasies.. Like every married person is gonna give up those tax advantages, those automatic benefits, no paperwork for declaring who is a 'spouse' and who isnt.. Yeah, their gonna give it all up so they all would be forced to pay attorneys big bucks for 'trusts' and spousal agreements, joint ownership etc etc.... yeah right..

Everyone would be in a civil union, it just wouldn't be called "marriage".

You go sell that to all those married folks.. see how many will laugh at you hysterically.

Well right, it's not feasible in reality but that's his position. I just don't like it when he's painted as being "anti-gay".

I hate to bust LIL'AIPAC's (W4) little bubble, but a littly transparency where he's concerned is in order.

Every time LIL'AIPAC brings up another topic against Paul like the story the other day about his being against separation of church and state, I and a few others present facts that dispell the myths, then he goes and tries to find something else to stretch the truth about Paul.

The fact is that LIL'AIPAC's real problem with Paul is that Paul is not for the interventionist Neo Con policies that the Israeli Lobby AIPAC and Israel itself tries to push on the US. These factions were heavily involved in pushing us to war in Iraq (GOOGLE who led us to war with Iraq) for their interests against US interests and now they are attempting to repeat the same trick with IRAN. Paul is against this which places him at 'crosshairs' since it is a primary goal of LIL'AIPAC's Israel Firster mentality. That is his real problem with Paul, all anyone has to do is read the voluminous posts re: the subject of Israel and it becomes plain that its his MO.

This totally proves that most gay men are unable to open their eyes beyond the democrat platform. SHEEP. I dont blame older gay men for "disliking" the republican party for what their views used to be. But we are talking about ONE man who has gone against his party for a majority of his career. HOLDING TRUE TO HIS VALUES and to the CONSTITUTION.

BoatnSunshine77 saidThis totally proves that most gay men are unable to open their eyes beyond the democrat platform. SHEEP. I dont blame older gay men for "disliking" the republican party for what their views used to be. But we are talking about ONE man who has gone against his party for a majority of his career. HOLDING TRUE TO HIS VALUES and to the CONSTITUTION.

IT IS HIS RIGHT to not approve of gays , but he KNOWS THAT IT IS NOBODYS RIGHT TO IMPEDE ONES VIEWS ON OTHERS

You're talking nonsense.

Check out realifedad's posts and threads on Ron Paul.He is an "older gay" man who's a strong supporter of Paul's.

And your claim that the Repub party's platform is different on gay rights from what it "used to be" - is bullshit.

The Repub party"s platform still contains a specific anti-gay plank that opposes gay marriage.The Repub platform is still just as anti-gay as it ever was.

Not only that but the Repubs have gotten MORE anti-gay in this election season.All three of the major Repub candidates for president have signed a pledge vowing to work to pass an AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION that would make gay marriage illegal nationwide forever.

All the states that are currently allowing gay marriages would be barred from continuing to do so and no other states would be allowed to start.Gay marriage would be made illegal from coast to coast and anti-gay bigotry would be ENSHRINED IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

THAT is the platform of the Repub party.

Paul may currently be mouthing a non anti-gay non racist agenda - but politicians say a lot of shit when they're running for president.Considering all the anti-gay racist stuff that Paul has said in the past - its impossible to know who the real Ron Paul is and what on earth he might do if he were ever elected president.

Just take a look back at the John McCain of the 2000 campaign and contrast it with the John McCain of the 2008 campaign.Two totally different politicians.

Politicians will say anything to try to get elected.Ron Paul is clearly no different.

I'm guessing he's totally in wuv with Ron Paul - despite his stance against the separation of Church & State, despite his racist comments over decades and despite his support for DOMA (he's a sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act!) and his opposition to ENDA.

Aside from hatists naturally attracting each other (say "Jew" or "Israel" and RLD immediately starts foaming at the mouth), he hates Israel more than he cares about equal rights for minorities - including gays. Heck, it probably doesn't bother RLD that Pat Buchanan endorses Ron Paul. Come to think of it, RLD would vote for Buchanan, too.